Sep
15
A problem of significance
Several people have drawn my attention to a recent article on a common error in published statistical analyses in neuroscience. Sander Nieuwenhuis, Birte Forstmann and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers published (in Nature Neuroscience) a critique of statistical analyses in the neuroscience literature. This paper has been written about by Ben Goldacre and Andrew Gelman (who published an article on the general problem some time ago) - so I won't go into too much detail.
The point of interest for me is that the error concerns something that most psychologists should know all about (and hence should be expected not to make the error). It concerns the case of two differences, one statistically significant and one non-significant.
The point of interest for me is that the error concerns something that most psychologists should know all about (and hence should be expected not to make the error). It concerns the case of two differences, one statistically significant and one non-significant.
